Can GOP paint Obama as apologist?

Republicans are hoping they have finally found the secret to taking on President Barack Obama — by portraying him as overly apologetic about U.S. misdeeds and naive about engaging unfriendly regimes abroad.

But tagging Obama as a “Jimmy Carter Democrat” on foreign affairs and national security may prove a difficult critique to make stick - at least for the moment.

Story Continued Below

That is because Obama and his aides have sought to inoculate themselves against the charge with a simple defense: This is what the public voted for in November.

The White House says Obama made clear that his foreign policy approach called for engagement and admitting mistakes where warranted and that voters embraced that sharp break with eight years of the Bush administration.

So for now, Republicans may find little political headway by bashing Obama for his cordial handshake with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, the release of so-called torture memos and other recent moves that have been criticized by Vice President Dick Cheney, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and some Republicans on Capitol Hill.

Though there are risks to Obama’s approach, there are also potential rewards — and in most cases, neither will be apparent for months at the earliest. And for the moment, the public is still giving Obama good marks for his handling of foreign affairs.

“Right now, the weight of public opinion is still with the administration and not with the Republicans,” said Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University.

See also

“Americans are open to the idea that negotiations are part of our future,” although, Zelizer added, “they are looking for what comes after the handshake.”

In other words, at some point, Obama’s fondness for engagement with foes and rivals and his willingness to dismiss arguments of the past will have to show results, or the Republican critique could start cutting into the president’s approval ratings and undermining his foreign policy approach.

Until then, Republicans face an uphill struggle at getting much traction with their critique, said Ari Fleischer, President George W. Bush’s former press secretary: “It’s as if cosmetics and pageantry are more important than the substance of foreign policy in the age of Obama.” Fleischer agreed that Obama is getting something of a pass from a domestic-focused American public.“But that only lasts so long,” he warned.

James Carafano, a senior fellow in foreign policy at the Heritage Foundation, said Republicans “can rally the troops and get it on the record, but it’s very hard to break the momentum [of the Obama administration] until reality intrudes.”

The reality for Obama overseas has proved remarkably positive so far. His first trip overseas, to Europe, gave Americans a glimpse of a popular president abroad — for some, a welcome change from the anti-Americanism that often greeted Bush.

Obama headed to a summit in Trinidad and Tobago after the rescue of Capt. Richard Phillips by Navy SEALS — an episode whose outcome stood in stark contrast to the long-running Iranian hostage crisis that crippled Carter’s presidency.

But every president eventually faces a national security crisis that tests his policies.

Another major terrorist attack against the U.S. or its interests abroad could sharpen criticism from former Bush administration officials of Obama’s counterterrorism polices, including the release of largely unredacted Justice Department memos describing interrogation procedures.

Administration officials insist that the decision to release memos describing the use of waterboarding and other harsh techniques against Al Qaeda prisoners does not diminish U.S. safety, especially since Obama has committed not to use the techniques in the future. The decision to outlaw the techniques may make the U.S. safer by removing a major complaint that Muslims have about the U.S., officials argued.